ABSTRACT
Both the European Union and the United States rely on the precautionary principle in many of their risk regulations. It is true that the lack of a precise and generally accepted definition of the principle makes comparative analysis rather difficult. Regardless of the definition one uses, however, it is a fact that both political systems apply precaution to imported goods or services with particular vigor. The domestic application of the principle is of course a different story. The situation of the European authorities is particularly delicate in this respect. On the one hand, the European Commission, pushed by the Council and the European Parliament (EP), has been engaged in a sustained effort to promote the precautionary principle (PP) to the status of a central plank of Community policy and, more ambitiously, to the status of a general principle of international economic and environmental law. On the other hand, the major beneficiaries of this promotional effort could well be the Member States of the EU, which may be tempted to use the principle to regain significant portions of their regulatory autonomy in the management of environmental and health risks. And the “Better Regulation” initiative advanced by the European Commission and several Member States over the past decade has in part moderated the promotion of the precautionary principle by applying impact assessments and reviews to major regulatory policies.
